Well, I’d like to think that my perspective combines two conflicting strands. One of the ‘interested observer’, teasing out the sociological ramifications of cutting edge city-states, with a romantic irrationalism that boarders on (selective) conservatvism. I.e. I share the fears Virilio, Heidegger et al voice/d concerning the acceleration of change.

In terms of where I stand politically (economically), wihich is crux I guess. It’s more complicated – and probably pending, really. Although your work got me into these topics, I wouldn’t say I’m a cheerleader of what Fisher called your ‘cybernetic hand’ in his Capitalist Realism book. I looked at the spontaneous order lot – not entirely convinced the free-market actually circumvents meddling humans. I’d be interested to know how different theory has been ‘upgraded’ since Adam Smith’s original thoughts.

On the other hand, I feel like a bit of a spy/assassin entering Goldsmiths. I was of the left for most of my 20s, but I’m closer to Junger’s ‘Anarch’ – and increasingly so these days. Surrounded by all the neo-marxists/zizekians etc. will be interesting. I was particularly irked by the the discourses in the accelerationist event at Goldsmiths in 2010, which, ironically, got me interested in ‘Fanged Noumena’. Everyone was just hysterical, emotive. Especially Nina Powers.

More to the point of your question. Here are some of the thoughts I’ve had on techno-capital recently.

*How has the accelerated nature of techno-capital, with it condensing information and cultural artifacts into virtual space, impacted cultural memory?

*The image played a part in the cultural theories of Debord and Baudrillard in the 20th century. To what extent does techno-capital/hyper modernity force academia to update these theories? How does a visual hegemony – through more sub-mediums than ever – influence techno-capital and vice versa?

*To what degree has the will-to-commodification bled into people’s perceptions and values? If subjects are becoming increasingly hyper-consumer/materialist, how does this impact us as citizens, aesthetes, and members of social spaces.

*The shopping mall and the sports arena are two of the major social/communal spaces left, yet, they, like popular modern music, complement the logic of neoliberalism/techno-capital, how can ‘culture’ recover from this?

*How is techno-capital affecting our cognitive/intellectual faculties? Are they being re-shaped, subdued, even denigrated?

*With the changing role of subjects as producers and workers, how does the ubiquity of techno-capital impact on our attitudes, valorisation and responses to work?

Well, I think I’ve got to an age where I tend not to be overtly partisan. This way I can look at the picture from further out. Emotions/psychological make up seem to dictate my interests/study enough. Why pile the flag-waving n’ black-or-white thinking and some?

As for not operating under another name, it’s out of principle(not carlessness or naviety). If my results suffer for not responding pavlovian dog style to the leftist cabal, so be it.

Neoliberals are pikers. They wouldn’t recognize “techno-capital/hyper modernity” if it was cabled directly into their brain-stems. For raw signal from the machine-id, you need to go trawling further out — into the reacto-libertarian abyss.

Hoppe, North, and Schlichter on the blogroll are all way beyond the horizon of ‘neoliberal’ ideas. Anybody Peter Thiel likes is sure to be interesting (e.g. Patri Friedman, who doesn’t write a lot, but is touched by genius — and some extraordinary genes).

It would be worth bringing Galton back (cloning him in a frog egg, or something) just to see what he’d make of the Friedman dynasty hereditary genius. Milton was still a ‘neoliberal’ (in the best, Latin American gringo-bashing sense) and not identifiably Austrian, David pushed that out all the way to Anarcho-Capitalism, and Patri found a way to get even further out — into ‘dynamic geography’, which is not easily distinguishable from Neocameralism seen from the other side (looking in from the Patchwork, with micro-states politically-disciplined by the requirements of market adaptation). Not only continuity, but escalation in the right direction. There has to be a book for someone in this astounding story: epic biography over three generations, combined with unique conceptual momentum. I’m not sure that a Schwarzenegger intro. would really work though.

My bad. I just tend to envisage the Mont Pelerin crew as one and the same. I knew of David (he talked at a Libertarian Alliance meeting I found out about via meetup.com – I didn’t attend). Patri definitely sounds like a go-to regarding ‘upgrades’ – didn’t join the dots regarding Patri-Neocameralism (something else I should read some more about). Cheers for all the recommedations!